Child Molestation and Bankruptcy Escapes

Ironically, it’s the Catholic Church that has invented this ruse.

The Archdiocese of Portland was the first to do it. Three months later the Roman Catholic Diocese in Tucson, AZ, followed suit and three months after that the diocese in Spokane, WA, did it, too.
They all filed for bankruptcy and since then more than 15 other Catholic dioceses and religious orders have filed for bankruptcy to seek protection from lawsuits by sexual-assault victims, resulting in about 4,000 claims seeking compensation for past wrongdoing. This year, three more Catholic dioceses announced intentions to file.

Escaping debt—escaping court ordered financial penalties for the Church’s abuse of children and women—through bankruptcy.

But, of course. The outcome of this ruse is

[T]he legal strategy uses the law that protects companies from creditors to help preserve its mission and shield assets from claims made by victims of sexual abuse. Filing for chapter 11 freezes lawsuits and provides breathing room to work out a plan to compensate abuse victims.

Never mind that there already are plans for compensating the children and women: the courts’ judgments and assigned penalties from those cynically frozen suits.  There’s nothing to work out.  Aside from that, I’m not sure that a mission that includes condoning officials’ abuse of the most helpless of their flock is a mission worth preserving.  Condoning? See the Pope’s response to attempts to punish priests who are found abusive. See his attempts to absolve higher officials—bishops and cardinals—of their responsibility for the abuses.

And the strategy is spreading.  USA Gymnastics and the Boy Scouts of America are both in or looking to bankruptcy as a way to escape judgment.  Condoning?  See USAG’s—and USOC’s, come to that—covering up of a doctor/trainer’s decades long abuse.

This stinks.

I’m not much enamored of Federal laws, but we need one here: bankruptcy must be legally barred as a means of avoiding financial responsibility for this sort of abuse.  We even have a precedent: college students can’t duck their student debt through bankruptcy, albeit that bar is newly in flux.

Churches (not just Catholic), and any other organizations whose leadership teams or individuals are found culpable of child abuse or sexual abuse of women, cannot be allowed to run away from their fiscal responsibility (criminal courts work the crimes here, already; although I’d certainly like to see the employing institution punished, also).  No debt “reorganization” through bankruptcy should be allowed.  Pay the judgment in full or cease to exist.  With one exception: the guilty ones must be permanently barred from taking any role other than parishioner or line employee in any religious institution, regardless of religion, or in any company in the originating industry.  If the bankruptcy court is empowered to require that, then any fiscal penalties could legitimately undergo some adjustment once publicly available proof has been provided that all the named individuals—and all of the individuals responsible must be named—have been so barred.

Sadly, this bar will have to be done civilly, since the Church, of which the Catholic Church and USAG have shown themselves the canonical examples for all institutions—have chosen not to.

Election Fraud

I follow a tax strategy discussion board on The Motley Fool and one question asked was whether the stipends a county pays its election monitors is whether the stipend is taxable income (whether or not a 1099 is issued.  Answer: Yes.)  This comment in the thread jumped out at me.

We both [husband and wife] got a stipend for the working at the polls [election monitor] this year…$150 each. The county did not ask for our SSN’s, nor a W-9.

There is no reason to believe this commenter is dishonest, but this lack of checking is election fraud waiting to happen.

A Hearing

Congressman Luis Gutierrez (D, IL) refused to participate in one last Thursday—the House Judiciary Committee’s hearing for the purpose of questioning DHS Secretary Kirsten Nielsen about the Trump administration’s (illegal) immigration policy.  Never mind that Gutierrez is a member of that committee.  He was present long enough to chew her out for six minutes, concluding his tirade with

Shame on us for wearing our badge of Christianity during Christmas and allowing the secretary to come here and lie.

Nielsen responded, in part:

I’m not a liar. We’ve never had a policy for family separation. I’m happy to walk the gentleman through it again. A policy of family separation would mean that any family I encountered in the interior, I would separate. It would mean that any family that I found at a port of entry, I would separate.
It would mean that every single family that I found illegally crossing, we would separate. We did none of those. What we did do is uphold the laws that Congress has passed, and we prosecuted those who choose to come here illegally.

And

Nielsen said the administration had shown compassion by working with other northern triangle countries to help migrants “as soon in their journey as possible,” blasting the current system that puts them at the mercy of abusers, traffickers, and child exploiters.

The system, mind you, that as Nielsen had just pointed out, was carefully put in place by Congress—of which Gutierrez was a member in good standing and who raised not a scintilla of objection to that system.

She concluded:

I take personal offense on behalf of the 240,000 men and women of the Department of Homeland Security.

Yewbetcha.  But Gutierrez was too intimidated by facts to stay and hear them.

Of course, this is the same Gutierrez who sold his Obamacare vote to then-President Barack Obama (D) like a Thursday night hooker in return for Obama’s promise to deal with immigration.  Obama paid Gutierrez’ fee by producing a vapid Executive Order saying, in essence, “I’ll think about it.”  And Gutierrez meekly accepted it.  He has a history, too, of running out when he doesn’t want to hear what’s being said.

The Progressive-Democrat Gutierrez: a streetwalking coward then and a Chamber coward today.

A US Appellate Court Thinks Americans Are Grindingly Stupid

Kellogg’s makes Cheez-Its, a cheesy, corny confection that’s attractive to lots of folks, especially at boring parties.  Some versions of this snack are marketed as “Whole Grain” or “Made With Whole Grain,” and the text on the packaging makes plain that this means 5 to 8 grams of whole grain for each 29-gram serving along with the primary ingredient being “enriched flour.”

This is too confusing for three women to bear, so they sued.  One of the women went so far as to claim she was injured by all of this, yet, were the packaging only changed, she would continue to purchase the products in the future (where are the feminists over this feigned stupidity?).  There started out some sanity in this idiocy:

A federal judge dismissed the case in 2017, ruling that the “Whole Grains” wording was factually correct. In toto, the label “would neither mislead nor deceive a reasonable consumer.”

Amazingly, the 2nd Circuit reversed.

Additional verbiage on the front and side of the package is no defense, the court said.

The 2nd Circuit thinks Americans are just too stupid for words.  Or it finds entirely reasonable that Americans are too mind-numbingly lazy to read a simple label.

What He Said

Alphabet’s Google CEO, Sundar Pichai, testified before the House Judiciary Committee last Tuesday, and he declined to justify his company’s decision to use the Southern Poverty Law Center as what the company calls a “trusted flagger,” a facility whereby these Trusted Ones can identify speech of which they personally disapprove as hate speech and thereby have it censored from Google’s products.  Pichai also was unable to explain why Google predominantly censored Conservative speech.  This prompted Congressman Louie Gohmert (R, TX) to take official notice of Pichai’s own bias.

You’re so surrounded by liberality that hates conservatism, hates people that really love our Constitution and the freedom it’s afforded people like you, that you don’t even recognize it.  It’s like a blind man not even knowing what light looks like, because you’re surrounded by darkness.

Sadly, the same can be said of Twitter’s CEO Jack Dorsey and his management team and of Facebook’s Chairman and CEO Mark Zuckerberg; Director, Ads, Business Integrity Rob Leathern; and the rest of Zuckerberg’s management team, as well.